Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Where is the wireless technology at thus far?  (Read 700 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
DV8
Guest
*

Karma: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« on: September 12, 2006, 07:59:05 AM »

I hear many people saying the same thing about the wireless thermostat technology, its not ready yet. Makes me wonder who will be the first one to come out with an actual working version of this?

Has anyone actually tried this out in an installation, or has this only been tested in the labs thus far?

DV8
Logged

Progress is not possible without deviation from the norm.
emmsys
Guest
*

Karma: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 30



WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2006, 02:41:17 PM »

Hi folks,

I would say the technology for wireless applications is there, it's just that it takes time to get people warmed up to the idea of wireless controls. There are a number of factors like interference, security etc. that are not usually issues in the wired world. I think people are playing a "wait-and-see" approach with wireless technology such as ZigBee. Once a few installations are up and running, and data comes pouring in, a lot more people will get involved.

As a teaser, Viconics is heavily involved in the ZigBee Alliance. Need I say more about our wireless escapades?  Lips Sealed  Wink

e
Logged
Mesh
Guest
*

Karma: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2006, 10:45:23 AM »

Hi,

What does it mean for something to be wireless anyway? Is there something wrong with using mains power but having all other functionality wireless? I think that's a reasonable first step. Do we really want all 250 thermostats in a hotel to be battery powered? Imagine replacing all those batteries every few years! Is that the goal for wireless anyway? Low power communication? Or less wires?

Mesh
Logged
emmsys
Guest
*

Karma: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 30



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2006, 12:07:09 PM »

Hi,

Mesh, you bring up some good questions. There are certain types of networks what are better suited to being completely wireless (i.e. no wires to the device at all). For example, let's say you want to monitor the moisture content of soil on a farm. It's preferable to use battery-powered wireless sensors rather than passing hundreds of meters of cable for communication and power. However, I think a good first step for some of the bigger wireless applications is keeping the communication wireless (like WiFi) but the devices mains powered. This will allow more routers in the network which in turn adds more redundancy and wireless paths. I wouldn't want to be the guy replacing all of the batteries either! But I also wouldn't want to be the guy paying for all of the cabling to be done either! So there needs to be a balance struck somewhere. I believe ZigBee is aimed at both, less wires, and wireless communication.

e
« Last Edit: September 17, 2007, 02:25:28 PM by emmsys » Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: